Chicago Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

At the end of a personal injury trial, juries must not only decide who is responsible for the injury, but also assign a specific degree of fault to that party. For example, if a jury finds a general contractor is responsible for a construction worker's injuries on a job site, then the jury must also specify the degree which it feels the general contractor was responsible, e.g., 60 percent, 70 percent, 75 percent, etc. The purpose of doing so is that if the jury finds the plaintiff was over 50 percent responsible for his or her own injury, then the defendant does not have to pay any damages.

The Chicago personal injury lawsuit of Harry Vasiliadis v. Joseph Cortese, 08 L 10080, is unique in that the jury found both parties to be equally responsible for the plaintiff's injuries. As a result, the parties needed to share the burden of paying for the damages sustained as a result of the intersection accident. The jury determined those damages to be $74,899; the defendant driver was only responsible for paying 50 percent, or $37,449. In Illinois, if the plaintiff is found to be more than 50 percent at fault, then he or she can receive no damages.

The facts surrounding Vasiliadis dealt with a 2008 intersection accident involving the plaintiff bicyclist and the defendant driver. Vasiliadis was riding his bicycle down a one-way street in the opposite flow of traffic. As Vasiliadis entered the Chicago intersection of Cuyler Ave. and Lockwood Ave., he was hit by Cortese's vehicle. Vasiliadis sustained a cervical spine fracture, which resulted in over $35,000 in medical bills.

Continue reading "Chicago Jury Rules Both Plaintiff and Defendant Responsible for Intersection Accident - Vasiliadis v. Cortese" »

A construction job site can be a confusing place. Not only is there the obvious confusion created by the construction itself, but the different levels of workers and managers further complicates matters. The tangled web of responsibility and liability on construction job sites becomes evident in the wake of a construction site injury, as lawyers sit down and try to determine whose to blame.

Consider the Illinois personal injury case of Piotr Mieszkowski v. Patel Builders Inc., Divyadeep Patel v. Illinois Brick Layers Inc., 08 L 4113. Piotr Mieszkowski was working as a brick layer at a job in South Barrington, a northwest suburb of Chicago. While at the construction site, the twenty-nine year-old Mieszkowski was being supervised by his boss from Illinois Brick Layers, Inc. Mieszkowski spent the majority of the morning working on building large stone columns and railings at the Barrington residence.

However, problems arose when Mieszkowski's boss left the construction site. While his direct supervisor was away, the construction job's general contractor asked Mieszkowski and his co-worker to help empty a large storage container. It was while performing this task, which had nothing to do with his actual job at the construction site, that Mieszkowski became injured. A large, heavy box fell on his ankle as he was emptying the storage container. Mieszkowski suffered a severe ankle fracture and needed to undergo an open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) surgery during which pins and rods were placed in his ankle to fix the fractured bone in place.

Continue reading "Cook County Brick Layer Injured, Multiple Parties Blamed - Mieszkowski v. Patel Builders, Inc., et al." »

There's an old saying that goes "never kid a kidder." Well, there should also be a saying to "never hit a lawyer," because if you do, chances are you are in for a lengthy and expensive legal battle. No one knows this better than Chicago cab driver Nick Papadopoulos who ran into a Chicago lawyer who was walking in a crosswalk. In the trial that arose out of the Chicago pedestrian accident, a jury entered a $594,245 verdict against Papadopoulos and his cab company employer, an amount that actually exceeded the defendants' insurance policy limits.

In December 2007, Bartholomew Sojka was out jogging with his dog in Chicago's Streeterville neighborhood. As Sojka continued to jog through an intersection at Inner Lake Shore Drive and Ohio Street, he was hit by Papadopoulos's cab. The twenty-eight year-old lawyer sustained a herniated lumbar disc as a result of the pedestrian accident. While Sojka has not yet undergone surgery to correct his back injury, his treating physician testified at trial that he is a surgical candidate for a lumbar laminectomy. However, the plaintiff stated that he is putting off the surgery due to professional obligations.

The resulting case was filed as Bartholomew Sojka v. Nick J. Papadopoulus, Alexander the Great Express, Inc., 09 L 1663. At the recent Cook County trial, both parties claimed that the other was responsible for the intersection accident. The plaintiff attorney accused the Papadopoulos of stopping at the stop sign. In addition, because Sojka was in the crosswalk at the time of the car accident, the plaintiff attorney was also able to make claims that Papadopoulos failed to yield the right of way to a pedestrian in the crosswalk. This would have been a much more difficult case to make if Sojka had been hit while crossing the street in the middle of a block.

Continue reading "Chicago Cab Driver Hits Lawyer - $594,245 Verdict Exceeds Cab Company's Policy Limits in Sojka v. Papadopoulus, et al." »

The City of Chicago is responsible for inspecting Chicago buildings and residences and making sure they are up to code. However, if a building owner is cited for code violations, there is only so much the City can do to persuade the building owner to maintain a safe environment. At some point, it becomes the building owner's responsibility to safely maintain the property for tenants and visitors.

The Chicago personal injury lawsuit of James Doyle, Administrator of the Estate of Michael Doyle, deceased, v. Kendard Management Corporation, 07 L 1988, is an extreme example of what happens if a building owner elects not to follow the City of Chicago's recommendations. The lawsuit was filed after 25 year-old Michael Doyle fell through the railings of a third-story porch. The case alleged that the building's management company knew that the porch was unsafe, but failed to notify its residents or take timely actions to improve the safety of the building's porches.

Doyle had been attending a friend's New Year's Eye party at 3180 N. Clark St. in Chicago's Lakeview neighborhood. According to eyewitness testimony, Doyle had been sitting in a chair with his back to the porch's rails and was either attempting to stand or move his chair at the time of the porch accident. However, the legs of his chair became stuck in the porch floor's slats, causing Doyle to slip and fall head first through the large gap in the porch's railings. Doyle was immediately transported to Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, but was pronounced dead on New Year's Day.

Continue reading "$2.7 Million Chicago Porch Death Settlement Puts Building Owners on Notice - Doyle v. Kendard Management Corp." »

There is the old adage that practice makes perfect, a concept that is easily applied to driving ability. In general, the longer a driver has been driving, the better he or she is at it. This is why teenage drivers are required to log practice hours before being eligible for their license and also why insurance rates are so high for young drivers. With more driving experience comes better judgment and skills.

The Illinois personal injury lawsuit of Lewandowski v. Butler, 08 L 5450, illustrates the idea that newer drivers lack some of the knowledge and skill that comes with more experience. The defendant driver was 17 years-old at the time of the relevant car accident. The auto accident took place at the intersection of Jackson St. and River Road in East Dundee, where the teenage driver hit the plaintiff's vehicle.

The teenage defendant was attempting to cross River Road and stopped at the stop sign as appropriate. He then continued through a line of stopped vehicles in the southbound lanes, at which point his view of the northbound traffic was obstructed by a large semi-truck. As the plaintiff was driving northbound on River Road, the defendant pulled out into her lane of traffic, resulting in the two-vehicle crash. As a result of the intersection accident, the plaintiff driver sustained severe back injuries, including exacerbation of her pre-existing herniated cervical disc injuries.

Continue reading "Teenage Driver Causes Intersection Accident - $177,624 Awarded in Lewandowski v. Butler" »

Summertime in Chicago is synonymous with construction - every Chicago resident is familiar with the site of orange cones, torn up pavement, and workers flagging cars through the construction zone. And while construction season means longer commutes for Chicagoans and increased traffic delays, it also means risker job conditions for many construction workers and more construction site injuries. The Chicago personal injury lawsuit of Donald Martinelli and Annette Martinelli v. City of Chicago, 06 L 11846, is an example of the dangers of construction work.

In 2002, 52 year-old Donald Martinelli and his co-worker were marking the location of underground telephone cables at a street construction project. While Martinelli and his coworker were SBC Communications employees, the construction site was run and managed by the City of Chicago. Martinelli was marking the cables' locations at the City's request.

At the same time this was happening, Oscar Soto was driving his car through the road construction site. When Soto realized the City of Chicago's construction equipment was blocking his lane of traffic, he made a decision to veer into the oncoming lane of traffic. However, Soto was eventually forced back into his lane by an oncoming vehicle, causing him to run into one of the SBC vans parked on the side of the road.

At the time of the Chicago car accident, Martinelli had finished marking the cable lines and was standing at the back of his SBC van. Martinelli became pinned against the back of his van and suffered a traumatic amputation of his left leg. The above the knee amputation required future medical expenses and resulted in lost wages due to Martinelli's inability to perform the same type of job duties. Martinelli brought a personal injury claim against Soto and the City of Chicago for the loss of his leg and livelihood, while his wife brought a loss of consortium claim against both parties for the loss of companionship and household assistance.

Continue reading "$6.95 Million Jury Verdict, Road Construction Injury to Worker Loses Leg, Struck by Car; Martinelli v. City of Chicago" »

In Illinois and Chicago, there are laws against talking on your cell phone while driving. The purpose of these laws is to eliminate a potential distraction to driving in an effort to increase driving safety and avoid preventable auto accidents. However, as is the case with any law, there are those who choose not to abide by the Illinois cell phone driving laws. The Illinois personal injury case Susan Budd v. Lynn Kelso, 06 L 11272, resulted from an auto accident where the defendant driver was talking on her cell phone.

In October 2004, Lynn Kelso was nearing the Willmette intersection of Ridge Road and Lake Avenue; she was talking on her cell phone at the time. Kelso proceded to drive her car into the busy intersection even though she didn't have the right of way. At the same time, plaintiff Susan Budd had a green light and as such had begun to drive through the intersection. As Kelso ran the a red light, Budd was forced to come to a sudden stop. While Budd's quick thinking prevented her from driving into Kelso's vehicle, it also caused the vehicle immediately behind Budd to rear-end Budd's vehicle. The rear-impact then forced Budd's vehicle forward, causing her to hit Kelso's car.

The 51 year-old Budd sustained lower back injuries as a result of the Cook County intersection accident. The rear-end impact aggravated plaintiff's pre-existing degenerative disc disease and resulted in a lumbar disc protrusion. Budd underwent extensive physical therapy and eventually elected to have steroid injections into her epidural region in an attempt to relieve the pain.

Continue reading "$170,754 Verdict Entered Against Cook County Driver Talking on Cell Phone - Budd v. Kelso" »

The Illinois Supreme Court overturned an Appellate Court ruling regarding parents' liability for underage drinking on their premises in Bell v. Hutsell, No. 110724 (May 19, 2011). The Appellate Court had found that the underage hosts' parents were responsible for the death of one of the underage partygoers who drove into a tree after leaving the party intoxicated. However, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the case facts supported a case of true nonfeasance on the part of the parents and as such failed to establish a duty to protect the third party decedent. As a result of the Illinois Supreme Court decision, Bell was dismissed with prejudice.

The original wrongful death complaint alleged that the defendants' son, Jonathan Hutsell, had hosted a party at their home. The 18 year-old decedent, Daniel Bell, attended this party where underage drinking took place; Bell died after he left the Hutsells's party intoxicated and drove into a tree. The Illinois complaint contended that the Hutsells had voluntarily assumed a duty to protect the partygoers, including the decedent; the complaint alleged that this duty was established by the Hutsells' instructions to their son that underage drinking would not be tolerated at the party and that they would be personally monitoring the party to ensure no minors consumed alcohol in their home. The plaintiff's contention regarding this "assumed duty" on the part of the Hutsells that is at issue in this wrongful death case.

However, the complaint further suggested that not only did the Hutsells fail to adequately perform their duty to the decedent, but were also aware that minors were consuming alcohol in their home. Therefore, the plaintiffs contended that the Hutsells had negligently performed their self-imposed duty to prevent underage consumption of alcohol at their son's party. While the defense argued that the plaintiffs had failed to provide adequate proof that the Hutsells had voluntarily undertaken a duty towards the decedent, the Appellate Court decision found that the defense had not provided enough evidence to support this claim and remanded the wrongful death lawsuit to the trial court.

Continue reading "Social Host Liability Decision in Underage Drinking Case Overturned By Illinois Supreme Court - Bell v. Hutsell" »

When we get into a train, plane, or cab, we expect that the person operating the vehicle will keep us safe, that it is their duty to us as passengers. Yet at what point do we actually become passengers? Is it when we begin to board the vehicle, or when we are inside and seated in the vehicle? The Chicago personal injury lawsuit of Daphne Franks v. Chicago Carriage Cab Corp., Chicago Elite Cab Corp., et al., 09 L 596, hinges on the question of when a person truly becomes a passenger.

The Cook County injury lawsuit involves 40 year-old Daphne Franks, who was talking to a cab driver in the early hours of the morning. At the time the cab was stopped about eight to ten feet from the curb and was partially blocking the flow of traffic. The plaintiff was leaning both her head and shoulders inside the front passenger window as she carried on a conversation with the cab driver.

Meanwhile, Stephen Nuter was driving down the street towards the stopped cab, which was blocking traffic. Nuter ended up rear-ending the cab while Franks was leaning inside the window. The impact from the car accident caused Franks to hit her head on the cab's window frame as she fell to the ground. Franks not only lost consciousness, but sustained several cuts to her face and a fractured bone. In order to repair the damage caused by the Chicago car accident, the bartender/waitress underwent two plastic surgeries.

Continue reading "Chicago Pedestrian Suffers Head Injury After Rear-End Car Crash - Receives $110,000 Verdict in Franks v. Chicago Carriage Cab Corp." »

Construction negligence lawsuits can be somewhat confusing insofar as there are typically several entities involved: the general contractor, the project manager, subcontractor, etc. Oftentimes when plaintiffs file a lawsuit following a construction site injury, there is a lot of finger pointing by the defense, so it is crucial that the plaintiff's attorneys have a clear understanding of who each party is and what their role was on the construction job.

In the construction negligence case of The Estate of John Maggi, etc. v. RAS Development, Inc., No. 1-09-1955, the defendant tried to get the $3.2 million verdict overturned by claiming that the plaintiff had sued the wrong entity. In Maggi, the plaintiff's attorney filed a lawsuit against the construction site's general contractor. In its initial complaint the plaintiff identified the general contractor as RAS Wolfram.

The Chicago construction negligence complaint alleged that as the general contractor, that RAS Wolfram was negligent for its failure to provide a safe workplace and inadequately supervising the work of its subcontractors. The decedent, John Maggi, died after falling three stories through an unprotected window. The fall was prompted after the bundle of bricks Maggi was carrying broke apart, causing him to lose his balance and fall through the open window.

Continue reading "$3.2 Million Verdict in Chicago Construction Death Trial Affirmed by Illinois Appellate Court in Maggi v. RAS Development, Inc." »

An Illinois jury entered the highest Cook County verdict award for an adult fracture injury, awarding $1.9 million in Todd D. Smart v. City of Chicago, No. 07 L 14089. The Cook County personal injury verdict was substantially higher than both the plaintiff's $500,000 demand to settle and the City of Chicago's $100,000 settlement offer. According to a representative from the City's law department, the City of Chicago plans to appeal the verdict in the First District Appellate Court.

The Illinois personal injury lawsuit arose out of a bicycle accident involving the 43 year-old plaintiff, Todd Smart. In 2007, Smart was riding his bicycle in Chicago's Lincoln Park neighborhood, near the intersection of Cortland St. and Marcy St., when he hit a road depression. At the time of the bike accident, the City of Chicago was performing road construction, leaving the road uneven at the time.

Smart was thrown forward over his handlebars as his bicycle came to a sudden stop. As a result of the bicycle accident, Smart suffered from a dislocated shoulder and sustained comminuted bone fractures. Prior to the bicycle accident, Smart led a fairly active lifestyle - not only was he the president of BeTuitive Publishing, but was also a former triathlon competitor.

Continue reading "Chicago Bike Injury Results in $1.9 Million Cook County Jury Verdict for Shoulder Fracture - Smart v. City of Chicago" »